B D TANDON Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ALL these petitions under Art. 226 of the Constitution can conveni ently be disposed of by a single judgment in so far as all of them are directed against the resolution dated 15th December, 1967 passed by the Regional Transport Autho rity, Lucknow Region, revoking strength on all the routes in Lucknow region with effect from the date of the resolution,

(2.) ALL the petitions except that of Writ Petition No. 314 of 1968 are operators on some or the other route in the Lucknow Region. The petitioner of Writ Petition No. 314 of 1968 is an association of operators providing motor passenger trans port on the routes In this State. These petitioners challenge the validity of the aforesaid resolution for a number of rea sons to appear from discussion to follow hereafter. The main relief in each case is that the Impugned resolution dated 15th December, 1967 passed by the Regional Transport Authority, Lucknow Region, Lucknow be quashed though in some peti tions some other reliefs have also been claimed, such as in Petition No. 65 it Is further prayed that the Regional Trans port Authority impleaded as opposite party No. 2 In it be restrained from issuing permits more than one on Unnao Sandila route to which it relates since applications had been invited for the grant of only one permit on that route and further that the Regional Transport Authority be restrain ed from issuing any temporary permit on that route during the pendency of the ap plications for tiie grant of permanent permit

(3.) I have heard learned counsel ap pearing for these petitioners and learned Standing Counsel appearing for the op posite party at some length. Three points have been urged in support of the peti tion. The first contention raised on behalf of the petitioners is that it is incumbent on the authority to give notice to the ex isting operators whenever it chooses to revise under Section 47 (3) of the Motor Vehicles Act strength on any route. A similar contention was raised before a Division Bench of. this Court of which I happened to be a member In the case of Lakshmi Narain Agarwala v. State Trans port Authority II. P. Lucknow, 1967 All LJ 657 -(AIR 1967 All 573). In that case the contention was rejected. Material observations which occur on page 660 (of All LJ) - (at p. 576 of AIR) may be re produced below:-